Good morning. Welcome. Please be seated. We will begin by hearing argument in the two cases that are on that we will hear simultaneously, state of new york et al. Versus United States department of justice and make the road new york versus kuchali. May it please the cord, jerry sinzdak appearing on behalf of the United States. Good morning. Good morning. The District Courts injunctions are flawed in several respects and should be set aside. As a threshold matter plaintiffs have failed to assert recognizable injury and they seek to promote an interest that is diametrically opposed to the purpose of the public charge statute. It therefore lacks standing. On the merits as the District Court found im sorry, as the ninth circuit found the rule easily is a reasonable interpretation of the public charge provision. Congress made clear in 1996 that it sought to ensure that aliens admitted to the country do not rely on Public Benefits but didnt it do that by making them ineligible for the most p
Congress make clear in 1996 that it sought to ensure that aliens admitted to the country do not rely on Public Benefits. That by making them ineligible for the most part for those benefits . It did of course make them ineligible. Concludedhat congress that after you have been here for a number of years, you are eligible for benefits, that reflects that you cannot predict for total accuracy what they will need. Predictere trying to this regulation. Correct. A difference between saying we did not predict this and saying we will authorize you to use benefits. That is different. They were not eligible before this point. That is right. Did not expect you to use them. Congress had every opportunity to elaborate on the public charge revision. Instead, they ignore that, y had 20tanding that the years before. They chose to deal with the problem in a different way. Understand how you draw from that the fact that congress chose to deal with this. They did not want to create an incentive. By makin
Supreme Court poised to block Biden administration s plan to limit health threat: [It] would undermine … the public interest yahoo.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from yahoo.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
Supreme Court justices on Wednesday, Feb. 21, appeared divided over whether the court should suspend federal air pollution regulations in upwind states until a lower court rules on a pending case against the Environmental Protection Agency.
EPA s good neighbor rule draws skepticism from Supreme Court finance-commerce.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from finance-commerce.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.